John 17:17  Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.

Questions to the

Philadelphia Church of God

PCG Armstrong College Graduate Minister asks Questions to PCG Members of the Church of Laodicea

 

 

1) Laodicean messenger / High Priest of Laodicea

 

On the subject of the Laodicean messenger, page 35 of Malachi’s Message states the following:

 

“If there is a Philadelphia-era human messenger, then logically, there is one for the Laodicean era also.

 

Isn’t the Laodicean story really about the Laodicean messenger rejecting the Philadelphian messenger? The last specific warning to the Philadelphia Church era was to let ‘no MAN take your crown’ (Rev. 3:11). Why would that be God’s LAST SPECIFIC WARNING to the Philadelphians unless it is about a specific man who would be the ‘messenger’ of the next era? Is the Laodicean messenger the man who tries to take your crown? The Philadelphians are too spiritually perceptive to allow this to happen…The last specific warning to the Philadelphians is followed by mentioning the last specific reward they will receive. The two are connected because the reward is given if they don’t allow a man (or Laodicean messenger) to take their reward.”

 

Furthermore, Revelation 3:14 (KJV) clearly states: “And unto the angel/pastor (Strong’s 32) of the Church OF the Laodiceans write…I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot…because you are lukewarm”…etc. Revelation 3:14-21-22 is written to the messenger OF Laodicea and not the messenger TO Laodicea. The word ‘of’ denotes ownership so, in this context, the indication is that the Laodicean messenger/pastor is Laodicean. On page 38 of Malachi’s Message the following is further emphasized: “Remember, God is primarily addressing the messenger of the Laodicean Church”. As scripture states, and as is confirmed in Malachi’s Message, Revelation 3:14 shows that God is primarily addressing and talking directly to the messenger, pastor or high priest leading the Church of Laodicea.

 

However, in the sermon of the12th May 2007, Mr. Flurry made a significant change to this crucial point. (Please refer to the messages in question if available).

 

a) Irrespective of who the PCG states the ‘angel’ of, or to, Laodicea is (Rev 3:14), God’s Laodicean Church is still His Church and should therefore have a living physical head as did all the other Church’s of Revelation 2 and 3. The spiritual condition of Laodicea (lukewarm) is better than that of Sardis (dead). Even though Sardis was a dead Church, it still had a leader/pastor/high priest.  How much more would Laodicea, a lukewarm Church, have a physical pastor (or high priest)?

 

(Note: The word “angel” in Rev 3:14 is number 32 in Strong’s and means “a messenger…by implication a pastor.”)

 

b) Who is the pastor (or High priest) of God’s Laodicean Church and where is he today?

 

 

2) Laodicea – lukewarm, rich and increased with goods

 

Revelation 3:17 shows us that Laodicea is rich and increased with goods. Page 38 of Malachi’s Message states: “anciently, the city of Laodicea was distinguished for its riches”. The Bible also tells us that outward possessions are one of the distinguishing characteristics of Laodicea. The text on page 37 (MM) also clearly demonstrates that Laodicea has abundant ‘outward possessions’. Furthermore, Strong’s tells us that the Laodiceans wax rich. This means that Laodicea grows and becomes richer as time goes on.

 

Malachi’s Message and other PCG publications identify the WCG as being Laodicea - the church that is ‘rich and increased with goods’. A picture of the Ambassador Auditorium in Pasadena is printed on page 39 (MM) indicating that this building best represents the Laodicean wealth.

 

a) Can the WCG still be labeled as God’s Laodicean Church – even though they do not keep the Sabbath (sign of God’s Church), nor the Feast days, tithing, law and so much more, and instead believe in the trinity,  Xmas, Easter and so many other pagan customs? Aren’t these traits so much worse than those of a dead Church, much less a lukewarm one? Even though the Sardis Church was a ‘dead’ Church, it at least had the Sabbath identifying it as God’s Church. Can the WCG still be identified as Laodicea at this time, even though they don’t even keep the Sabbath which is a sign of God’s Church? (Note: Laodicea is still God’s Church Rev 1:20).

 

b) Is it still correct to teach that the WCG is the Church that is ‘rich and increased with goods’ even though they no longer own the auditorium, the colleges, headquarters facilities etc? Is the WCG really Laodicea, a Church that is meant to be rich and increased with goods, even though their income is spiraling downwards? Is the WCG waxing rich (Rev 3:17), or have they sold and lost all their ‘riches’? Laodicea was distinguished for its riches. At this present time, can the WCG be ‘distinguished’ as Laodicea even though they have no outward possessions to speak of?

 

c) Since outward possessions are one of the distinguishing factors of the Laodicean Church, where is God’s Laodicean Church that is today waxing rich with physical goods?

 


3) Day of the Lord/Day of the Lord’s wrath

 

The PCG teaches that the Day of the Lord is a one year period that comes on the scene after two and a half years of tribulation. It is taught that Christ will return at the end of the Day of the Lord.

 

a) 1 Thess 5:2 and 2 Peter 3:10 state that ‘the Day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night’.

 

During the tribulation, the Two Witnesses will be warning the world of the impending final year of tribulation (or ‘Day of the Lord’ as the PCG teaches it). In this case, will the last year of tribulation come ‘as a thief in the night’ or will the Laodiceans and the world more likely be expecting it?

 

b) Revelation 3:3, 16:15 and other scriptures say that Christ will return ‘as a thief in the night’. Won’t the Two Witnesses also be prophesying of this event throughout their 1260 day ministry? In this case, would the return of Christ with His bride (Rev 19:11,14) at the end of three and a half years of tribulation really come ‘as a thief in the night’? Matthew 24:30 also clearly says that ‘they will see the Son of man coming in the clouds with power and great glory’ and Revelation 1:7 says ‘He comes with clouds and every eye shall see Him’. With all this in mind, will Christ’s visible return come quietly, ‘as a thief in the night’ or will He come with ‘power and great glory’ and ‘every eye will see Him’? Is ‘Christ coming as a thief’ and ‘Christ coming in the clouds with great power and glory’ speaking about two different events?

 

c) As mentioned in the scriptures listed above in this point, 1 Thess 5:2 and 2 Peter 3:10 tell us that the ‘Day of the Lord’ will come as a thief in the night. On the other hand, Rev 3:3 and Rev 16:15 tell us that ‘Christ’ will come as a thief in the night. The PCG teaches that both these events are separated by a one year period. If so, are these two events which will both come ‘as a thief in the night’?

 

d) Matthew 24:38, 50, Luke 12:46 etc, tell us that the Day of the Lord will come as a ‘thief in the night’, at a time when people ‘are eating, drinking, and giving in marriage’, at a time when they are least expecting it. However, two and a half years into the tribulation, when the PCG says the Day of the Lord will begin, will people really be ‘eating, drinking and giving in marriage’ and carrying on as normal, or will the earth be plagued with chaos and destruction? Don’t these scriptures indicate that the ‘Day of the Lord’ will begin at a time when things are going on as normal, when we are not expecting it, very possibly prior to the beginning of the tribulation? Furthermore, doesn’t 2 Peter 3:10-12 clearly indicate that the Day of the Lord continues for a much longer period of time even beyond the millennium? See also Zechariah 14:1, 8-9, 11, 16-21, and others.

 

e) Mr. Armstrong wrote an article entitled “How the WCG came into being”. This appeared in the Good News magazine of November 6th, 1978. In this article, he wrote: “The apostle John relates, ‘I was in the Spirit on the Lord’s Day…’ (Revelation 1:10). In other words, John was taken IN VISION, by the Spirit of God, into the far future DAY OF THE LORD. From the time of Adam to now - approximately 6,000 years - we have been in the day of MAN, deceived and led by Satan.

The period foretold in more than 30 prophecies called the "Day of the Lord" is the time when God supernaturally intervenes and begins taking over the world - starting very shortly, perhaps one to three years, before the second coming of Christ to RULE ALL NATIONS.

The apostle John, in vision, was taken into this "Day of the Lord" called "the Lord's day" in Revelation 1:10. This period "the Day of the Lord," especially that phase of it PRIOR to Christ's coming (although it shall continue through the millennium), is the THEME of the book of Revelation.”

 

This is an interesting quote written by Mr. Armstrong. Doesn’t it show that perhaps Mr. Armstrong understood that there was more to the ‘Day of the Lord’ than what was widely understood during his time?

 

f) The PCG teaches that the four horsemen spoken of in Revelation have already begun their ride. Revelation 1:10 clearly tells us that these four horsemen (Rev 6) come on the scene during the Day of the Lord. Since the four horsemen (first four seals) begin their ride prior to the tribulation (fifth seal), wouldn’t this indicate that the Day of the Lord has already begun, when Christ came ‘suddenly to His temple’, (Mal 3:1, Mal 4:5 etc), ‘as a thief in the night’ (1 Thess 5:2; 2 Peter 3:10 etc), at a time when people didn’t realize it because they were ‘eating, drinking, marrying, and giving in marriage’ (Matt 24:38)?

 

g) Rev 6:16, Isaiah 34:8, Isaiah 62:1, Isaiah 63:4, Zephaniah 1:18, Zephaniah 2:2-3 and other scriptures talk about the ‘Day of the Lord’s wrath’, the ‘Day of the Lord’s vengeance’ or the ‘Day of the Lord’s anger’. Other scriptures such as Mal 4:5; Rev 1:10; 2 Peter 3:10 and others talk about the ‘Day of the Lord’. Don’t these scriptures show that the ‘Day of the Lord’ and the ‘Day of the Lord’s wrath’ are two different events? Isn’t the Day of the Lord’s wrath the seventh seal (Rev 8:1 – Rev 9:21) which is opened during the Day of the Lord (Rev 1:10)?

 

h) The PCG teaches that the biblical phrase “in that day” refers to the “end time”. However, a study into the context of each passage this phrase appears in the bible clearly shows that it actually refers to the Day of the Lord (which begins just before the first of the four seals are opened [prior to the tribulation] and continues throughout the millennium and beyond, as mentioned above). “In that day” refers to which day? The Day of the Lord?! Please look at biblical passage where the phrase ‘in that day’ appears, and the context in which it is spoken of by reading preceding verses and chapters. On close examination, doesn’t this show that the phrase ‘in that Day’ refers to a time during the Day of the Lord.

[With limited understanding at the time, in August 1971 an article was written entitled “The Bible defines – ‘That Day!’”. This appeared in the August 1971 Tomorrow’s World magazine, and alludes to the fact that the phrase ‘in that day’ refers to the ‘Day of the Lord’.]

 


4) No contact ruling

 

Around December 2005, the no-contact ruling on all those baptized in the WCG, PCG or any of the offshoots has been reinforced and now even includes family members. Romans 16:17 is clear in what it states, talking about marking ex-members that bring doctrines to the Church which are contrary to what is taught in the bible. However, the following scriptures have been incorrectly used on different occasions to validate this no-contact ruling against the ‘Laodiceans’: 2 Thess 3:6,14; Ephesians 5:11; and 1 Corinthians 5:11.

 

a) 2 Thess 3:6 tells us to withdraw ourselves from the brother that walks ‘disorderly and not after this tradition which he received’ so that ‘he may be ashamed’ (verse 14). Chapter 3 tells us who the ‘disorderly’ are, and it also tells us what ‘this tradition’ is: Verses 7 – 12 clearly indicate that the ‘disorderly’ spoken of is referring to a brother who is lazy, does not work, and becomes a busy body (see verse 11 specifically). Verse 10 also clearly demonstrates what the ‘tradition’ is: “if any do not work, then they should not eat”. Verse 14 again confirms that we should not have company with those brothers that break the tradition given “by this epistle” (verses 10 and 14).

 

The King James Version is clear enough in what it states, but using other versions can perhaps help give an even clearer rendition of verses 6-14 if it is needed:

 

“Brothers and sisters, in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ we order you not to associate with any believer who doesn’t live a disciplined life and doesn’t imitate us. We lived a disciplined life among you. We didn’t eat anyone’s food without paying for it. Instead, we worked hard and struggled night and day in order not to be a burden to any of you. It’s not as though we didn’t have a right to receive support. Rather, we wanted to set an example for you to follow. While we were with you, we gave you the order (tradition): “Whoever doesn’t want to work shouldn’t be allowed to eat”. We hear that some of you are not living disciplined lives, you’re not working, so you go around interfering in other people’s lives. We order and encourage such people by the Lord Jesus Christ to pay attention to their own work so they can support themselves. Brothers and sisters, we can’t allow ourselves to get tired of doing what is right. It may be that some people will not listen to what we say in this letter. Take note of them and don’t associate with them so that they will feel ashamed. Yet, don’t treat them like enemies, but instruct them as brothers and sisters.”

Aren’t these scriptures talking about not associating with brethren that are lazy busybodies? Has this got anything to do with shunning sincere but deceived Laodiceans?

 

b) 1 Corinthians 5:11 tells us not to keep company with any brother that is a fornicator etc. Today, the PCG attributes this to the “spiritual fornication” that the people are supposedly engaged with in one of the church offshoots. However, doesn’t verse 1 of this chapter emphasize that Paul is here talking about the physical sins which were prevalent in the Church during his time? If the PCG shuns the Laodiceans because they claim they are ‘spiritual fornicators’, how can the PCG also teach that the Laodiceans are the ‘virgins’ spoken of in the ‘ten virgin prophecy’ found in Matt 25? Are the Laodiceans ‘spiritual fornicators’ or are they ‘virgins’? They cannot be both! Has 1 Corinthians 5:11 got anything to do with shunning the Laodiceans?

 

c) Ephesians 5:11 tells us to ‘have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness’. Strong’s tells us that these words mean ‘to not participate in dubious, obscure or shady works’ (Strong’s 4655 and 2041). Doesn’t this mean that we should have clean motives as we go about our affairs and to make sure we don’t get involved in underhanded or shady business? Has Ephesians 5:11 got anything to do with shunning our Laodicean family?

 

d) Does the ruling on shunning the ‘Laodiceans’ lend itself, in some cases, to breaking the fifth commandment?

 

e) I have known people to capture an interest in God’s work as a direct result of the example set by the membership. The PCG is now told to shun almost all those having any past and present contact with the WCG, PCG or any of the splinter groups including physical family members. Could the fruits of this ruling be interpreted as a bizarre example to those with whom we really should be lights (1 John 2:8-10; 1 Thess 5:5; Eph 5:8, 13 etc)? Does the ruling lend itself to a possible unbiblical reason for the evident splitting up of physical families? Can shunning really be seen as extending a helping hand to spiritual brothers in God’s Laodicean Church (Rev 3:14-22) who are deceived and desperately need help? Is this ruling denying spiritual family the light they so desperately need (Ephesians 5:13) at this crucial time?

 


5) The Little Book and the seven thunders

 

Revelation 10:2-4 (KJV) states the following: “And he had in his hand a little book open and cried with a loud voice, as a lion roareth: and when he had cried, seven thunders uttered their voices.” Strong’s tells us that the word “when” could be better translated as “after” or “as soon as”.

Another Bible translation of these scriptures reads as follows:

 

“He held a small, opened scroll in his hand. He set his right foot on the sea and his left on the land. Then he shouted in a loud voice as a lion roars. When he shouted, the seven thunders spoke with voices of their own. When the seven thunders spoke, I was going to write them down. I heard a voice from heaven say “Seal up what the seven thunders have said, and don’t write them down”

 

a) Don’t the above verses indicate that ‘when’, (‘after’ or ‘as soon as’), Christ ‘cried’ and ‘roared’ the contents of the Little Book, the seven thunders then uttered their voices in reply to the message of the Little Book? Wouldn’t the words ‘when’, ‘after’ and ‘as soon as’ indicate that the seven thunders are not a part of the ‘little book’, but are in fact in response to it?

 


6) The two Joshua’s

 

The article on the ‘two Joshua’s’ was published in the September/October 2006 Royal Vision. It describes a type of ‘lawful Joshua’ written about in the books of Haggai, Ezra and Nehemiah and a type of ‘unlawful Joshua’ (Mr. Tkach) spoken of in the book of Zechariah.

 

a) On closely examining each of these four books, it seems like the Joshua mentioned in each case is ‘the son of Josedech’ (Hag 1:1,12,14, Ezra 3:2,8; 5:2; 10:18; Nehemiah 12:26 and Zech 6:11). Do the ‘two Joshua’s’ – lawful and unlawful – both have a father named Josedech?

 

b) The PCG teaches that Mr. Tkach was the end-time type of Joshua. Mr. Tkach meanwhile died in 1994, which means that he has been off the scene for the better part of this ‘Laodicean era’. Doesn’t Zechariah 3:8 indicate that an “unlawful” Joshua is on the scene around the time of Christ’s return? Doesn’t Zechariah 6 indicate that Joshua does in fact repent and is given a crown?

 


7) ‘Joshua had come to be clothed with filthy garments’: Zech 3:3 & MM p.67

 

On page 67 of Malachi’s Message under the heading ‘Who is Joshua?’ Zech 3:3 is emphasized as follows:

 

“[Joshua] was in charge, reigned before Christ came, and then went astray while he reigned—in God’s Church. Joshua didn’t begin with filthy garments and a corrupt mitre. He became that way as he ruled” (Zech 3:3)

 

In the new “James” booklet, the following is stated and emphasized:

 

“Mr. Armstrong fervently prayed that the spiritual rain — the revelation of God — would stop coming into God's Church, and that it would begin again after 3½ years. In order to pray that, he must have recognized the rebellion in the Church — probably far more than we have realized. Why else would he pray that God would cut off His revelation and guidance until He ‘raised up’ a new work?  Events prove that this prayer was answered.”

 

Mr. Stephen Flurry’s book ‘Raising the Ruins’ complements this. The inside front flap of his book states: “Tkach’s men altered doctrines under Mr. Armstrong’s nose even before he died’ and ‘the Tkach transformation was driven from the start by an agenda that even shocked most of the top ministers’. Mr. Stephen Flurry also states the following on page 158 of his book: “As we have already seen in this volume, Tkachism’s intent to change major doctrines began just as soon as Mr. Armstrong died – even before”

 

a) The PCG has recently explained Elijah’s prayer (above), and also has a knowledge of the circumstances and events that took place prior to, and immediately after, Mr. Armstrong’s death. Furthermore, we know that God gave absolutely no revelation to Mr. Tkach when he was in office. Does all this indicate that Mr. Tkach took office on 16th January 1986 already having filthy garments? If the article on ‘Elijah’s prayer’ and the above information on Tkachism in Mr. Stephen Flurry’s book ‘Raising the Ruins’ are correct, can Mr. Tkach really have fulfilled the Joshua prophecy of Zech 3:3, which states that Joshua began with clean garments?

 

b) James 5:17 states that Elijah prayed for no rain. The PCG attributes this to Mr. Armstrong, the end-time Elijah, praying for no rain, or ‘spiritual revelation’, because he sensed the Church was already going off-track (James booklet). Mr. Armstrong meanwhile died and Mr. Tkach took over the physical leadership of the Church. Verse 18 then goes on to state: “And he (Elijah) prayed again and the heaven gave rain…”. This means Elijah persistently prayed again after the three and a half years and it rained again. How could these scriptures be assigned to Mr. Armstrong when he couldn’t have ‘prayed again’ for rain, since he was already dead when the three and a half years where up?

 

c) The verses immediately prior to James 5:17 deal with the anointing and healing of the sick. This is the context. Verse 16 goes on to admonish us to pray fervently for one another as we patiently wait for healing to take place. Isn’t it so clear that verses 17 and 18 where inspired so that we could refer back to the original Elijah’s prayer which is clearly and fully outlined in 1 Kings chapters 17 and 18? Don’t these scriptures in James point us back to Elijah’s example of persistent prayer which he engaged in, for an end to the three and a half year drought being experienced during his time? Isn’t this an example of persistent prayer which we are encouraged to follow when patiently waiting for healing? Isn’t this what James 5:17-18 is really about?

 

 

8) Daniel 8:14 (1150 days) versus James 5:17 (1260 days)

 

The PCG uses these two scriptures in the new ‘James’ booklet to substantiate the claim that Malachi’s Message was revealed 1150 days after Mr. Armstrong’s death, and that the rain then started pouring down in the Church 1260 days after his death.

 

Daniel 8:14 states: “And he said unto me, Unto two thousand and three hundred evenings and mornings (or 1150 days); then shall the sanctuary be cleansed.” (Translations for the word ‘cleansed’ are ‘justified’ or ‘made righteous’).

 

The following is said in the ‘Daniel Unsealed at last’ booklet, under the sub heading ‘1150 days’:

“On January 16, 1986, the daily was taken away, signaling the beginning of the 1150 days. Using January 16, 1986, as our beginning point makes Saturday, March 11, 1989, the end of the 1150 days…Though I do not remember the exact date God began revealing Malachi’s Message to me, it is safe to say that it was on or around March 11, 1989.”

 

On the other hand, James 5:17 states: “Elijah was a man subject to like passions as we are, and he prayed earnestly that it might not rain: and it rained not on the earth by the space of three years and six months” (or 1260 days). Strong’s here demonstrates that God ‘absolutely denied’ rain for this period of time (vs. 17-18 and Strong’s numbers 3361 & 3756). The new ‘James’ booklet supports and confirms this.

 

a) Taking both of these scriptures into consideration, did God begin revealing after 1150 days (Dan 8:14), or was there 1260 days of drought (James 5:17) during which God ‘absolutely denied’ rain? How do Dan 8:14 and James 5:17 correspond?

 

b) An article entitled “Daniel’s ‘2300 Days’ Prophecy revealed at last” which appeared in the June 1960 Good News magazine specifically talks about Daniel 8:14. It states that the sanctuary or Church will be ‘cleansed’ or ‘justified’ (past tense) at the end of the 1150-day period. The article demonstrates that the sanctuary can only be cleansed at the point of the resurrection, and not before. Doesn’t this tie in with Revelation 19?

 

 

9) That Prophet

 

The PCG uses John 1:20-21, 25 as proof that ‘that prophet’ is separate to Elijah and Christ.

 

a) The following is an extract of an article entitled “Is Judaism the Law of Moses?” which appeared in the March 1962 Good News magazine. It states: “In New Testament times, the Jews were still looking for that prophet who was to be like God and have the power of being lawgiver… There has only been One individual since the time of Moses to fulfill the role of Lawgiver and God. This One is Jesus Christ! He fulfilled the role of That Prophet to the letter. Even many of the Jews themselves, after observing the mighty works done by Christ, recognized that He was the One like unto Moses. Notice: ‘Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth, That Prophet that should come into the World’ (John 6:14)”. Does this scripture in any way relate to John 1:20-21, 25?

 

b) John 6:14 and John 7:40 are almost identical scriptures:

                        Joh 6:14  Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, This is of a truth that prophet that should come into the world.

 

Joh 7:40  Many of the people therefore, when they heard this saying, said, Of a truth this is the/that 3588 Prophet.

(Note: Strongs 3588 = ‘the’ or ‘that’.)

 

The phrase ‘of a truth’ in John 6:14 and 7:40 is 230 in Strong’s and could be translated as ‘surely’ or ‘indeed’. John 6:14 could read, “Then those men, when they had seen the miracle that Jesus did, said, this is indeed That Prophet that should come into the World.” John 7:40 is an almost identical verse to John 6:14. Do either of these scriptures in any way relate to John 1:20-21, 25?

 

c) In the ‘Prophecy Class’ at Herbert W. Armstrong College, we were taught that there are seven keys to understanding prophecy. The second of these keys is “duality”. In this context, we understand that there are first and last century parallels. For example, John the Baptist was the first century Elijah while Mr. Armstrong was the last century Elijah; Christ came in the first century and He is again about to return. If ‘that prophet’ is an individual other than Elijah or Christ in this end-time, who was his first-century parallel? Should we apply the ‘key of duality’ in this case?

 

 

10) 144,000 of Revelation 14

 

Revelation 14:1-4 states the following:

 

Rev 14:1  And I looked, and,  lo,  a Lamb stood on the mount Zion, and with him a hundred forty and four thousand, having his Father's name written in their foreheads.

 

Rev 14:2  And I heard  a voice from heaven, as the voice of many waters, and as the voice of a great thunder: and I heard the voice of harpers harping with their harps:

 

Rev 14:3  And they sung as it were a new song before the throne, and before the four beasts, and the elders: and no man could learn that song but the hundred and forty and four thousand,which were redeemed from the earth.

 

Rev 14:4  These are they which were not defiled with women; for they are virgins. These are they which follow the Lamb whithersoever he goeth. These were redeemed from among men, being the FIRST FRUITS unto God and to the Lamb.

 

a) The PCG teaches that these 144,000 are Laodiceans that repent in the tribulation. Matthew 25 is used to back the claim that 50% of the Laodiceans will not make it. If this is the case, there must be 288,000 Laodiceans in total that go into the tribulation. Could this be correct if there were only about 120,000 or so members in the Church at the death of Mr. Armstrong? Many have since died and others have fallen by the side. Don’t 288,000 sound like a high number of Laodiceans?

 

b) Where does scripture indicate that these 144,000 are repentant Laodiceans? In Mr. Armstrong’s co-worker letter dated 22nd August 1983, he indicates that the 144,000 are Philadelphian first fruits. The PCG teaching on this has been changed from what the Elijah taught. If this change is biblical, then it should be welcomed. But - is this change biblical? Don’t Rev 14:1-4 plainly and clearly state that there will be 144,000 first fruits in total?

 

 

11) Discontinuation of the tape library

 

A few years ago the CD/tape library was discontinued. Leading men were/are instructed to destroy all CD’s with messages on them immediately after listening to them after Sabbath Services. In addition to this, CD’s/tapes sent to ‘shut-ins’ were now to be sent only once a month instead of six times a month (four Sabbath sermons and two bible studies). The messages sent to shut-ins where to be pre-selected and could not be a message given by the Pastor General.

 

A number of shut-in members can only listen to a message from their Pastor General once a year – at the Feast of Tabernacles. If a shut-in member is unable to attend the Feast of Tabernacles due to reasons approved by their Regional Director, they cannot hear a message given by the Pastor General during that given year. A number of shut-in members haven’t been able to attend the Feast in a number of years for legitimate reasons. These people haven’t heard Mr. Flurry speak since the ruling of the discontinuation of the tape library came into force. Many of the brethren living in foreign language countries don’t have the Royal Vision magazine to fall back on. Others don’t have the Trumpet magazine either. Most don’t have booklets. Many of these people probably wouldn’t even have a clue about the changes made to Malachi’s Message, for example, or of any of the other “new revelation”.

 

a) If only a few selected messages are going out to these shut-in members, how could these brethren ‘prove all things’ being taught by Mr. Flurry and the other ministers?

 

b) In John 21:15-17, Christ three times admonishes to ‘feed His sheep’. How is this being done with the many shut-in members scattered worldwide?

 

c) Shouldn’t the ministry feel uneasy with this ruling, particularly in light of Ezekiel 34:2-3; Jeremiah 23:1-4; Isaiah 40:11; John 21:15-17?

© Church of God's Faithful 2017